Citations

Abstract We retrospectively reviewed all patients receiving bortezomib, lenalidomide and dexamethasone induction followed by autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) within 12 months of diagnosis for multiple myeloma at the Mayo Clinic. 243 patients treated between January 2010 and April of 2017 were included in the study. Median age was 61 (interquartile range, 55-67) with 62% of patients being male. High risk cytogenetic abnormalities (HRA) were present in 34% of patients. 166 (68%) patients received some form of maintenance/other therapy post transplant (no maintenance (NM, n=77), lenalidomide maintenance (LM, n=108), bortezomib maintenance (BM, n=39) and other therapy (OT, n=19)). Overall response rate was 99% with complete response (CR) rate of 42% and 62% at day 100 and time of best response post transplant respectively. The four cohorts categorized by post transplant therapy were well matched for age, gender and ISS stage. HRA were more common amongst patients receiving bortezomib maintenance or other therapy post transplant (NM 18% vs LM 22% vs BM 68% vs OT 79%, p<0.0001). Two year and five year overall survival rates were 90% and 67% respectively with an estimated median overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS) of 96 months and 28 months respectively for the whole cohort. OS was not significantly different when stratified by post-transplant therapy (Median OS 96 months for NM vs not reached for LM vs 62 months for BM vs not reached for OT, p=0.61), however post-transplant therapy was predictive of PFS (median PFS 23 months for NM vs 34 months for LM vs 28 months for BM vs 76 months for OT, p=0.01). High risk cytogenetics was associated with a worse OS but not PFS when compared to patients with standard risk (median OS: not reached for standard risk vs 60 months for HRA, p=0.0006; median PFS: 27 months for standard risk vs 22 months for HRA, p=0.70). In patients that did not receive maintenance therapy presence of HRA was a strong predictor of OS and PFS (median OS: not reached for standard risk vs 36 months for HRA, p<0.0001; median PFS: 24 months for standard risk vs 7 months for HRA, p<0.0001). Patients receiving maintenance therapy appeared to have a similar PFS and OS irrespective of cytogenetics (median OS: not reached for standard risk vs 62 months for HRA, p=0.14; median PFS: 35 months for standard risk vs 34 months for HRA, p=0.79).On multivariable analysis ISS stage III and achieving CR/stringent CR predicted PFS whilst the only independent predictors of OS were presence of HRA and achieving CR/stringent CR. The combination of bortezomib, lenalidomide and dexamethasone followed by ASCT is a highly effective regimen producing deep and durable responses in many patients. Maintenance therapy in this cohort may overcome the poor prognostic impact of high risk cytogenetic abnormalities. Table Table. Disclosures Dispenzieri: Celgene, Takeda, Prothena, Jannsen, Pfizer, Alnylam, GSK: Research Funding. Lacy:Celgene: Research Funding. Dingli:Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Other: Participates in the International PNH Registry (for Mayo Clinic, Rochester) for Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Millennium Takeda: Research Funding; Millennium Takeda: Research Funding; Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Other: Participates in the International PNH Registry (for Mayo Clinic, Rochester) for Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.. Kapoor:Celgene: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding. Kumar:KITE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Gertz:Abbvie: Consultancy; Apellis: Consultancy; annexon: Consultancy; Medscape: Consultancy; celgene: Consultancy; Prothena: Honoraria; spectrum: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy; janssen: Consultancy; Ionis: Honoraria; Teva: Consultancy; Alnylam: Honoraria; Research to Practice: Consultancy; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy.

Abstract Background: We previously reported successful treatment of myeloma with an oncolytic virus, MMV-NIS. Preexisting immunity against measles made use of that virus unsatisfactory. The Indiana strain of Vesicular Stomatitis Viruses (VSV) are being developed as anticancer drugs for the treatment of a variety of malignancies. To ensure tumor selective replication and spread, we designed the VSV to encode interferon beta. Expression of IFNβ also serves as a STING agonist to activate host immunity against the cancer. The sodium iodide symporter (NIS) is inserted as a reporter gene into the viral genome to enable noninvasive monitoring of viral spread using PET/CT imaging. We report a Phase I clinical trial of intravenous administration of VSV-IFNβ-NIS for relapsed hematological malignancies including MM, AML, and TCL. Methods: Arm A consisted of patients with low tumor burden. Arm B included patients with high tumor burden. Both arms consisted of a classical 3+3 phase I trial, starting at 5x10^9 TCID50 (dose level 1) through 5x10^11 TCID50 (dose level 4), given as a single IV dose. In order to obviate potential toxicity from high interferon levels, Arm B received ruxolitinib 15 mg twice daily for 10 days beginning on day -1. The primary objective was determining the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of VSV-IFNβ-NIS alone and in combination with ruxolitinib; secondary objectives include estimating the safety profile and preliminary efficacy. Correlative objectives include monitoring the pharmacodynamics of viral replication through SPECT/CT imaging with NIS gene, viremia, virus shedding, changes in the immune profile of peripheral blood leukocytes, and immunohistochemistry for immune cell infiltrates in tumors. Adverse events (AEs) are reported herein based on CTCAE v4 with the exception of cytokine release syndrome (CRS) which is based on Lee (Blood 2014; 124(2):188-195) criteria. Results: To date, 10 patients have received IV VSV-IFNβ-NIS; 8 in Arm A and 2 in Arm B. In Arm A, 3 patients were treated at dose level 1, 3 at dose level 2 and 2 at dose level 3. At dose level 1, there were three grade 3 hematologic AEs (neutropenia [1], lymphopenia [2]), and no grade 3+ non-hematologic AEs. At dose level 2, there were two grade 3 hematologic AEs (anemia [1], lymphopenia [1]), and two grade 3 non-hematologic AEs (nausea [1], dehydration [1]). A grade 2 CRS by Lee criteria was also observed. At dose level 3, 2 patients have been enrolled and data are maturing for DLT evaluation. In Arm B (VSV + rux), 2 patients have been enrolled and data are maturing for dose limiting toxicity (DLT) evaluation. Other grade 1 and 2 toxicities have included fever, hypertension, headache, electrolyte abnormalities, nausea, vomiting, transient elevation of liver function tests and creatinine. All grade 1 and 2 toxicities resolved within 72 hours. Among the 6 patients evaluable for response, there was one partial remission (TCL patient treated at dose level 2), and 5 with progressive disease. Multiple cytokines increased at 4h post infusion of virus, but most returned to baseline levels by 24h.Viremia was detectable in all patients at the end of infusion, and to varying levels at 30 mins, 1, 2, 4, 24, 48h or 72 hours post virus infusion. No persistent viremia was observed. No infectious virus was recovered in buccal swabs or urine and neutralizing anti-VSV antibodies were present by day 29. Extensive immune phenotyping and ELIspot assays for shared antigens are ongoing. Conclusion: In the lowest dose levels tested to date, VSV-IFNβ-NIS has not led to any observed dose limiting toxicity. Dose escalation is ongoing and updated results will be reported. Disclosures Lacy: Celgene: Research Funding. Peng:Vyriad: Equity Ownership. Russell:Vyriad: Equity Ownership. Dueck:Bayer: Employment; Phytogine: Employment; Pfizer: Honoraria. Witzig:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Dispenzieri:Celgene, Takeda, Prothena, Jannsen, Pfizer, Alnylam, GSK: Research Funding. Gertz:spectrum: Consultancy, Honoraria; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy; Ionis: Honoraria; janssen: Consultancy; Medscape: Consultancy; celgene: Consultancy; Apellis: Consultancy; Prothena: Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy; annexon: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Research to Practice: Consultancy; Teva: Consultancy; Alnylam: Honoraria. Dingli:Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Other: Participates in the International PNH Registry (for Mayo Clinic, Rochester) for Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Millennium Takeda: Research Funding; Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Other: Participates in the International PNH Registry (for Mayo Clinic, Rochester) for Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Millennium Takeda: Research Funding. Kapoor:Celgene: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding. Al-Kali:Novartis: Research Funding. Naik:Vyriad: Equity Ownership. Kumar:AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; KITE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; KITE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Oncopeptides: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction: Prognosis of AL amyloidosis has improved in recent years; however for many patients prognosis remains poor. We aimed to define patient-, disease- and treatment characteristics which are associated with long-term survival. Method: A retrospective chart review of all patients with biopsy-proven systemic AL amyloidosis, who were seen within 90 days of the confirmed diagnosis. Long-term survival was defined as 5-year and 10-year survival from the time of diagnosis. For 5-year survival we selected patients seen between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2012 (allowing a minimum of 5-year follow-up, n=1331) and for 10-year survival we screened patients seen between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2007 (allowing a minimum of 10-year follow-up; n=779). Treatment allocation was defined as the first regimen given, irrespective of subsequent treatment modifications. Results: Of the screening population, 498 patients survived ≥5 years from diagnosis (37% of the 5-year screening cohort) and 168 patients survived 10 years or more (22% of the 10-year screening cohort). Five-year survivors and 10-year survivors as compared to their counterparts were (Table): younger, higher proportion of women, more likely to have single organ involvement, less heart/liver/nerve involvement and more kidney involvement. Long-term survivors also had lower bone marrow plasma cell percentage at the time of diagnosis and lower tumor burden measured by the difference between involved to uninvolved light chain (dFLC). Similarly, long-term survivors had lower Mayo stages and higher systolic blood pressure. No difference in light chain isotype was observed between long-term survivors to long term non-survivors. Long-term survivors were less likely to be seen within 30 days of diagnosis compared to their counterparts (52% among 5-year survivors vs 67% among 5-year non-survivor; P<0.001). FISH abnormalities (data available for 555/1331 patients, 42%) were comparable between groups with regard to t(11;14) (50% among 5-year survival compared to 50% among 5-year non-survivors; P=0.93) and 13q abnormalities (34% vs 36%, respectively; P=0.53). However, trisomies were less frequently encountered in the 5-year survivor group (20% vs 29%, respectively; P=0.01), and far less common among 10-year survivors (11% vs 26%, respectively; P=0.04). Autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) was more likely to be associated with long-term survival. Of all patients who underwent ASCT, 74% survived more than 5 years and 49% survived more than 10 years. In comparison, among the standard-intensity therapies, 5-year survival rates for melphalan-dexamethasone, bortezomib-based regimens, immunomodulatory drug-based regimens and single agent dexamethasone/ melphalan-prednisone were 29%, 28%, 30% and 10%, respectively. The corresponding 10-year survival rates were 15%, 20%, 20% and 5%, respectively. Conclusions: Long-term AL survivors have distinct favorable baseline characteristics (including those introduced by referral bias) and ASCT as their initial therapy. Identification of these patients, especially the Mayo 2004 stage III and the Mayo 2012 stage III-IV patients who unexpectedly survived 10 years, will allow for further study and insights. Disclosures Gertz: Teva: Consultancy; Prothena: Honoraria; Alnylam: Honoraria; celgene: Consultancy; Ionis: Honoraria; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy; Research to Practice: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; janssen: Consultancy; Apellis: Consultancy; Medscape: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; spectrum: Consultancy, Honoraria; annexon: Consultancy. Lacy:Celgene: Research Funding. Dingli:Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Other: Participates in the International PNH Registry (for Mayo Clinic, Rochester) for Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Millennium Takeda: Research Funding; Millennium Takeda: Research Funding; Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Other: Participates in the International PNH Registry (for Mayo Clinic, Rochester) for Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.. Kapoor:Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Russell:Vyriad: Equity Ownership. Kumar:KITE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; KITE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Merck: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Research Funding; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Oncopeptides: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Dispenzieri:Celgene, Takeda, Prothena, Jannsen, Pfizer, Alnylam, GSK: Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction: Outcomes in multiple myeloma have significantly improved in recent times owing to the availability of newer more effective therapies. Autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) has been used for over three decades to treat multiple myeloma. We aimed to evaluate the outcome of patients receiving ASCT at our institution between 1990 and 2015. Patients and Methods: A total of 2025 patients received ASCT at Mayo Clinic Rochester between 1st January 1990 and 31st December 2015. The patients were divided in to three cohorts of approximately equal time period, Cohort 1 (1990-1999, n=144), Cohort 2 (2000-2009, n=909) and Cohort 3 (2010-2015, n=972). Outcomes of interest were early mortality, progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Disease characteristics were documented from time of diagnosis and PFS and OS were calculated from date of ASCT unless otherwise stated. Results: Median age for the whole cohort was 60 years (range 24-77) and increased over time (55 Cohort 1 vs 59 Cohort 2 vs 61 Cohort 3, p<0.0001). The proportion of males (60% for whole cohort) was not significantly different between the 3 time periods. Almost all patients (99%, n=2018) received chemotherapy prior to transplantation (median lines of therapy 1, range 0-6). The number of patients receiving >1 line of therapy prior to transplantation decreased over time (67% Cohort 1 vs 27% Cohort 2 vs 34% Cohort 3, p<0.0001). The use of novel agents was congruous with their availability and increased over time (0% Cohort 1 vs 59% Cohort 2 vs 100% Cohort 3, p<0.000). After a median follow up of 84 months (95% CI, 78-91 months), median PFS and OS for the whole cohort were 24 and 66 months respectively. Both PFS and OS improved significantly over time (median PFS: 12 months Cohort 1vs 18 months Cohort 2 vs 33 months Cohort 3, p<0.0001; median OS: 26 months Cohort 1vs 63 months Cohort 2 vs 83 months Cohort 3, p<0.0001), Figure 1. The improvement in PFS and OS over the 3 time periods was seen in patients receiving early (≤ 12 months from diagnosis) and delayed (>12 months) ASCT, Table 2. OS from diagnosis was no different for early versus delayed transplant in Cohort 1 and Cohort 2 (Cohort 1: median OS 57 months for early vs 56 months for delayed, p=0.24 and Cohort 2: median OS 81 months for early vs 82 months for delayed, p=0.70) and showed a trend towards a marginal benefit for delayed transplant in Cohort 3 (median OS 105 months for early vs 109 months for delayed, p=0.046).Treatment related mortality (100 days post transplant) improved over time (7.6% Cohort 1 vs 1.8% Cohort 2 vs 0.7% Cohort 3, p<0.0001), Figure 2A. Mortality within 12 months of ASCT also improved over time (24% Cohort 1vs 8% Cohort 2 vs 6% Cohort 3, p<0.0001). A landmark analysis of OS from 12 months post ASCT continued to reveal improved survival over time(median OS 26 months Cohort 1vs 63 months Cohort 2 vs 83 month Cohort 3, p<0.0001), Figure 2B. Conclusion: ASCT remains an important therapeutic option for eligible patients with multiple myeloma. There has been a marked improvement over time in PFS and OS and reduction in treatment related mortality and early mortality in myeloma patients receiving ASCT. This is likely to reflect the addition of novel agents to induction regimens and improved post transplant therapies. Despite these improvements myeloma remains incurable with patients continuing to relapse and die many years after ASCT. Disclosures Dispenzieri: Celgene, Takeda, Prothena, Jannsen, Pfizer, Alnylam, GSK: Research Funding. Lacy:Celgene: Research Funding. Dingli:Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Other: Participates in the International PNH Registry (for Mayo Clinic, Rochester) for Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Millennium Takeda: Research Funding; Millennium Takeda: Research Funding; Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Other: Participates in the International PNH Registry (for Mayo Clinic, Rochester) for Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.. Kapoor:Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Kumar:Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; KITE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Gertz:Research to Practice: Consultancy; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; spectrum: Consultancy, Honoraria; celgene: Consultancy; annexon: Consultancy; janssen: Consultancy; Alnylam: Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy; Ionis: Honoraria; Teva: Consultancy; Apellis: Consultancy; Medscape: Consultancy; Prothena: Honoraria.

Abstract Introduction Lenalidomide is an immunomodulatory drug that is active in newly diagnosed as well as relapsed multiple myeloma (MM). The goal of this study is to describe patients with newly diagnosed MM remaining on lenalidomide for more than 3 years (long term responders) as well as patients that after discontinuing lenalidomide were able to maintain disease control while only on observation (LenO group). Methods We retrospectively reviewed 283 patients with newly diagnosed MM that were treated with lenalidomide between January 2003 and January 2011. We excluded patients that underwent early autologous stem cell transplant (n=102) or had less than 3 years of follow-up (n=6), leaving 175 patients for the current analysis. Results Long term responders Thirty-three patients (19%) received lenalidomide for more than 3 years. When compared to patients receiving lenalidomide for less than 3 years, at baseline, long term responders were more likely to have standard risk disease (64% versus 44%, p=0.03) and less likely to have high risk disease (18% versus 4%, p=0.04). They were more likely to have achieved a deeper response (VGPR versus PR, p<0.001) and had a longer median time to best response (6 versus 4 months, p<0.001). When considering the 12 patients who received lenalidomide for more than 5 years, this group was more likely to have achieved a deeper response (CR versus PR, p<0.0001) and had a longer median time to achieving best response (9 versus 4 months, p<0.0001) than those 163 patients who remained on lenalidomide for fewer than 5 years. Observation group Thirty-three patients (19%) discontinued lenalidomide for reasons other than progression and were observed without receiving further treatment (LenO group). Prior to moving to observation, five patients had received lenalidomide for more than three years. Indications for stopping in the LenO group included: prolonged disease stability (n= 20); and toxicity (n=13). The only differences in baseline characteristics between the LenO group and patients that were not observed off any treatment was depth of response, with 61% (n=20) of LenO in VGPR or better versus 23% (n=23) in the remainder, p=0.0003. Median PFS from the time of discontinuing lenalidomide was significantly longer in those patients who took lenalidomide for more than 1 year (n=24) when compared to patients taking it for less than one year (n=9) (median PFS off therapy was 38.5 months versus, 14.9 months log rank 0.08; Wilcoxon p<0.05), figure 1a; PFS for those treated for 1-2 years (n=11) as compared to 2 years or greater (n= 13) were comparable to each other (data not shown). Among those taking lenalidomide for at least a year, PFS from time of discontinuing lenalidomide was superior in patients who had achieved a VGPR/CR (n=20) as compared to those who achieved only a PR (n=13) (Median 48.4 months versus 14.8 months, log-rank p<0.05; Wilcoxon p=0.01), figure 1b. Conclusion Approximately one out of five patients with newly diagnosed MM can achieve responses lasting more than three years while on treatment with lenalidomide. Patients with standard risk FISH and those achieving at least VGPR are more likely be long-term responders. Furthermore, long-term responders were more likely to be slow responders. We also demonstrate that suspension of lenalidomide therapy after 1 year among those patients achieving a VGPR or better can result in long-term disease control and can be considered as a therapeutic strategy. Disclosures: Kumar: Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium: Consultancy, Research Funding; Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding. Gertz:Celgene: Honoraria. Lacy:Celgene: Honoraria. Dispenzieri:Celgene: Research dollars Other.

Abstract Background: The introduction of several novel agents has led to an improvement in response rates and survival outcomes in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Despite significant therapeutic advances a subset of patients with multiple myeloma do not achieve a deep response to first-line treatment and biomarkers are needed to identify those at risk. Methods: We studied 472 patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who were treated in clinical practice (n = 280, training cohort) or on prospective clinical trials (n = 192, validation cohort) at Mayo Clinic between 12/2003 and 12/2015. All patients had measurable disease (M-spike ≥ 1.0 g/dL) and received treatment with novel agents. Serum M-spike and free light chains (FLC) were measured before and after the first treatment cycle. The outcome of interest was the best response to first-line treatment (evaluated using the International Myeloma Working Group Uniform Response Criteria). Failure to achieve a deep response was defined as not achieving a very good partial response or better. The serum parameters of interest were the relative decrease in M-spike and absolute free light chain difference (ΔFLC). The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to compare the serum parameters before and after the first treatment cycle. Logistic regression models were used to assess the associations between the change in serum parameters after the first treatment cycle and best response to first-line treatment. P-values below 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Results: The median age at diagnosis in the training and the validation cohort were 67 (32 - 94) and 66 years (41 - 86), respectively. One hundred eighty one (65%) and 103 patients (54%) were male, respectively. The three most common regimens in the training cohort were lenalidomide + dexamethasone, lenalidomide + cyclophosphamide + dexamethasone, and bortezomib + lenalidomide + dexamethasone. In the validation cohort, the three most common regimens were carfilzomib + thalidomide + cyclophosphamide, lenalidomide + cyclophosphamide + dexamethasone, and ixazomib + cyclophosphamide + dexamethasone. In the two cohorts, the median baseline M-spike decreased from 3.1 g/dL (1.0 - 10.0) to 1.7 g/dL (0.0 - 6.6) and 3.2 g/dL (1.0 - 8.5) to 1.4 g/dL (0.0 - 4.5) after the first treatment cycle, respectively (p < 0.001 for both comparisons). The median baseline ΔFLC decreased from 31.1 mg/dL (0.0 - 2269.7) to 5.4 mg/dL (0.0 - 785.8) and from 23.3 mg/dL (0.1 - 3579.6) to 4.3 mg/dL (0.0 - 1139.3) after the first treatment cycle, respectively (p < 0.001 for both comparisons). M-spike reduction < 50% during the first treatment cycle was associated with failure to achieve a deep response: OR 4.54 (95% CI 2.72 - 7.58, p < 0.001) in the training cohort and OR 6.68 (95% CI 3.42 - 13.03, p < 0.001) in the validation cohort. Patients with reduction in M-spike < 10% during the first treatment cycle experienced failure to achieve a deep response in 86% (25/29) and 100% (10/10), respectively. ΔFLC reduction < 50% during the first treatment cycle was associated with treatment failure to achieve a deep response: OR 4.83 (95% CI 2.83 - 8.25, p < 0.001) in the training cohort and OR 5.09 (95% CI 2.37 - 10.92, p < 0.001) in the validation cohort. Patients with reduction in ΔFLC < 10% during the first treatment cycle experienced failure to achieve a deep response in 83% (34/41) and 91% (19/21), respectively. Conclusions: Early changes in M-spike and ΔFLC are strong predictors of response to treatment. We established and prospectively validated two readily available biomarkers that can identify patients at risk for treatment failure and may inform treatment decisions in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Disclosures Lacy: Celgene: Research Funding. Gertz:Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy; janssen: Consultancy; Teva: Consultancy; Alnylam: Honoraria; Research to Practice: Consultancy; Apellis: Consultancy; Medscape: Consultancy; annexon: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; celgene: Consultancy; Prothena: Honoraria; Ionis: Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy; spectrum: Consultancy, Honoraria. Dispenzieri:Celgene, Takeda, Prothena, Jannsen, Pfizer, Alnylam, GSK: Research Funding. Russell:Vyriad: Equity Ownership. Kapoor:Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Kumar:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; KITE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

Abstract Background: It is well known that the staging stratification at diagnosis predicts survival in immunoglobulin light chain (AL) amyloidosis, but there is a paucity of literature delineating the prognostic value of these systems at the time of 2nd-line therapy. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study to evaluate the prognostic value of AL staging among 563 patients with staging data, who initiated a 2nd-line therapy between 2000 and 2015. Both the Revised Mayo 2012 staging system and the European revision of the Mayo 2004 staging system were used. Results: The median time from initial treatment to 2nd-line therapy was 11.6 months. Median follow-up from institution of 2nd-line therapy was 54.1 months. The 1st-line therapy for patients was autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) in 216 (38%) patients; and 2) non-ASCT therapies in 347 patients. Both staging systems were prognostic with a risk ratio of 9.4 (95%CI: 6.0, 15.1; p<0.0001) between stage IIIb and I, and of 12.2(8.1, 18.5; p<0.0001) between IV and I. At the time of 2nd-line therapy the staging systems' predictive values were independent of what the patients' 1st-line therapies had been despite the fact that the median time from initial treatment to 2nd-line therapy was 19.4 months in ASCT group and 8.0 months in non-ASCT group. Among the patients receiving 2nd-line therapy after ASCT, the 5-year overall survival (OS) from 2nd-line therapy for those with ≤ stage II versus >stage II was 65% and 31% (Mayo 2004) and 70% and 23% (Mayo 2012). The respective numbers for patients relapsing from a non-ASCT therapy were 57% and 26% (Mayo 2004) and 60% and 23% (Mayo 2012). Conclusions: This study indicates that the Mayo staging systems work well at the time of instituting 2nd-line therapy and is independent of whether 1st-line therapy was ASCT based. Figure. Figure. Disclosures Gertz: annexon: Consultancy; Medscape: Consultancy; Apellis: Consultancy; celgene: Consultancy; Prothena: Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy; spectrum: Consultancy, Honoraria; Ionis: Honoraria; Research to Practice: Consultancy; Teva: Consultancy; janssen: Consultancy; Alnylam: Honoraria. Kumar:KITE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Lacy:Celgene: Research Funding. Dingli:Millennium Takeda: Research Funding; Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Other: Participates in the International PNH Registry (for Mayo Clinic, Rochester) for Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Other: Participates in the International PNH Registry (for Mayo Clinic, Rochester) for Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Millennium Takeda: Research Funding. Kapoor:Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Russell:Vyriad: Equity Ownership. Dispenzieri:Celgene, Takeda, Prothena, Jannsen, Pfizer, Alnylam, GSK: Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction: Localized immunoglobulin light chain amyloidosis (LAL) is a rare disease. Systematic data regarding its presentation, management and patient outcomes are limited to small case series. Our objective was to systematically describe the Mayo clinic experience of patients with LAL. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed clinical records of 403 patients with biopsy proven localized amyloidosis seen at the Mayo Clinic between 1969-2014. Median follow-up for survival and progression were 72 months and 39 months, respectively Results: OF 5551 patients with light chain amyloidosis seen at the Mayo clinic during the study period, 403 (7%) had LAL. Median age at diagnosis was 60 years (range, 13-93) and 51% of them were male. Sites involved included: urothelial (bladder, ureter, renal pelvis), 75 (19%), larynx, 51 (13%), lung parenchyma, 42 (11%), skin, 44 (11%), synovial tissue 36 (9%), tracheobronchial, 31 (8%), gastrointestinal tract, 30 (8%), seminal vesicles, 22 (6%), eyes, 23 (6%), pharynx 22 (6%) and other 24 (6%). Typing was performed in 178 (45%) cases. A monoclonal protein was detected in 23 of 351 (7%) evaluated cases, 5 of which had different light restriction from that of LAL. Thirty one (8%) patients had a co-existent autoimmune disease. No patients progressed to systemic AL. Of 403, 109 (27%) were observed or received supportive care only and 241 (60%) underwent local removal of the amyloid deposits. Sixty-four (16%) patients required repeated interventions (median 1, range 1-4, upper decile requiring 4 interventions) for progressive disease. The most common sites requiring repeated interventions were: urothelial (33%), laryngeal (19%) and tracheobronchial (8%). Ten year overall survival (OS) and progression free survival were 79% and 61%, respectively and there was no difference according to site of involvement. Of the 70 patients that died during the follow-up period, cause of death was known for 29 and death was attributed to LAL in only 2 cases. Conclusions: In the largest series of patients with LAL reported so far we demonstrated that LAL has an excellent prognosis but can sometimes be associated with significant morbidity. Although our study was limited by incomplete typing in 55% of cases, it appears that true LAL does not "progress" to systemic amyloidosis. However, systemic amyloidosis can frequently involve organs typical involved only in LAL;, therefore a complete work-up for systemic disease should be performed in all patients with LAL. Treatment usually involves local excision for symptom palliation. In 16% of cases, repeated interventions for relapse/progression were required and as a result, follow-up is recommended, especially for cases involving the urothelial and upper respiratory tract. Disclosures Kumar: Skyline, Noxxon: Honoraria; Celgene, Millennium, Onyx, Novartis, Janssen, Sanofi: Research Funding; Celgene, Millennium, Onyx, Janssen, Noxxon, Sanofi, BMS, Skyline: Consultancy.

Abstract Background: Among patients with immunoglobulin light chain (AL) amyloidosis, there is little consensus on when reinstitution of chemotherapy should occur (Milani and Dispenzieri, International Society of Amyloidosis 2016). AL amyloidosis patients who are treated with high dose chemotherapy followed by autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) are a relatively low-risk and homogenous population, making them an ideal group to study practice patterns. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study to evaluate the patterns of relapse or progression and the timing of re-initiation of therapy among 146 patients who were initially treated with ASCT at Mayo Clinic between 1996 and 2009 and who received second-line therapy between 7/9/1997 and 4/12/2012. Results: The median time from ASCT to second-line therapy was 23.6 months and the median follow up post ASCT was 57.5 months. The indications for second-line treatment were: 1) both hematologic and organ progression 24.7% (36 patients); 2) organ progression only 41.1% (60); 3) hematologic relapse only 34.2% (50). The median dFLC at the time of starting second-line therapy was 10.5 mg/dL (1.6 - 59.5 mg/dL), which was 44.9% (13.8-167.2%) of dFLC level at diagnosis. Increase in proteinuria by > 50% from nadir (that was also at least 1g/24 hours, i.e. renal progression) was present in 35.8%. Increase in NT proBNP by >30% from nadir and minimum of 300 pg/mL was present in 48.9% of patients. The respective 4 years overall survival rates from the time of ASCT were 87.8%, 63.9%, and 56.7% (p=0.0016) for patients who had hematologic relapse, organ progression only and both organ and hematologic progression. Comparisons of laboratory markers at diagnosis, nadir of post ASCT and initiation of second-line therapy are listed in the table. Conclusions: Our study investigated the patterns of relapse / progression following upfront ASCT. This provides some insights on practice patterns of when physicians re-initiate therapy. Table Table. Disclosures Gertz: NCI Frederick: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Med Learning Group: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Research to Practice: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Research Funding; Prothena Therapeutics: Research Funding; GSK: Honoraria; Sandoz Inc: Honoraria; Ionis: Research Funding; Alnylam Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Annexon Biosciences: Research Funding. Kumar:Millennium: Consultancy, Research Funding; Array BioPharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Noxxon Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Glycomimetics: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy; Skyline: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kesios: Consultancy. Kapoor:Celgene: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding. Dispenzieri:Prothena: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Alnylam: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Jannsen: Research Funding; pfizer: Research Funding; GSK: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

Abstract BACKGROUND Light-chain amyloidosis (AL) is the most common form of systemic amyloidosis, with an incidence of approximately 1 case/100,000 person-years. Clinically relevant data with regard to the very young (≤ 40 years) patients (pts) are scant. We present a case-control study of very young pts with AL seen at a single institution. METHODS We reviewed the medical records of all pts with AL who were consecutively evaluated at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN between 01/01/1995 and 12/31/2015. The clinical characteristics and survival outcomes of very young pts at the time of AL diagnosis (cases) were compared to a 2:1 matched cohort of pts (controls) with AL who were 65 years or older and matched by the time of diagnosis. Upfront autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) was defined as transplantation within 6 months of the diagnosis of AL. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to all time-to-event analyses. The average years of life lost was computed by subtracting the mean survival from diagnosis observed in the cohort from the mean survival expected in the population based on life-tables. RESULTS Of 3433 pts with AL, 50 (1.5%) pts were ≤ 40 years of age at diagnosis (cases). Fatigue, peripheral edema, dyspnea and bleeding were less common at presentation in cases compared to controls (table A). The cases were also more likely to have liver or GI involvement (OR= 3.45, 95% CI: 1.6-7.2). Unusual initial clinical features in the cases included unprovoked splenic rupture (2%) and erectile dysfunction (4%) observed 6-15 months prior to the diagnosis of AL in cases; no such features were observed in the control group. The median time between the onset of symptoms and definitive diagnosis was 0.4 years (95% CI: 0.3-0.7) for the cases and 1 year (95% CI: 0.8-1.2) for controls (p<0.0001). The ECOG performance score at diagnosis was ≥2 in 51% of cases compared to 78% of the controls (OR= 0.29, 95% CI: 0.14-0.63). The involvement by 3 or more organs at diagnosis was comparable [24 (48%) cases compared to 34 (34%) controls (p=0.11)]. Concomitant myelomatous (AL-CRAB) features were evident in 12% of each group and 27 (54%) cases and 37 (41%) controls had >10% BMPCs without active myeloma (AL-PCMM) (p=0.16). Monoclonal light chain involvement without involvement of heavy chain was seen in 23 cases (50%) and 31 controls (32%), (OR= 2.1, 95% CI: 1.04-4.37). The median follow-up was similar for cases and controls, [10.9 years (95% CI: 7.6-12) vs 9.9 years (95% CI 8-14)], respectively. The estimated average years-of-life lost was 8.6 years over 20 years of follow-up in cases, (Figure 1a). In cases, 1 and 10-year overall survival (OS) from diagnosis was 73% and 51%, respectively (median OS 12.7 years; 95% CI: 4.0-NR) while, in controls, 1 year and 10 year OS was 62% and 15% respectively (median OS 2.1 years; 95% CI (1.0-3.6), p<0.001), (Figure 1b). Cardiac involvement was associated with a worse OS in both cohorts, (cases: median OS was 3.2 years with cardiac involvement (95% CI: 0.6-8.7) vs NR (95% CI: 8.0-NR) in those without; p=0.003; controls: median OS was 1.1 years with cardiac involvement (95% CI: 0.53-1.6) vs 4.8 years (95% CI: 3.7-8.1) in those without; p=0.02. Thirty one of 47 (66%) cases were eligible and 20 of 79 (25%) controls were eligible for upfront ASCT. In cases, upfront ASCT was associated with a longer OS. Median OS was NR (95% CI: NR-NR) in pts who underwent upfront ASCT (n=25) vs 4.0 years (95% CI: 0.5-8) in pts who did not, p≤0.0001. For controls, the median OS was 9 years (95% CI: 0.5-11) for pts who underwent upfront ASCT (n=7) vs 1.6 years (95% CI: 1.0-2.8) for pts who did not (n=93), p=0.26. In cases, six (12%) pts underwent solid organ transplantation (kidney 5, heart 1) and none in the control arm. CONCLUSIONS AL amyloidosis is infrequently encountered at the age of ≤40 years, but the loss of productive years of life and the disease burden are substantial in this cohort. A substantial delay in diagnosis from the onset of symptoms was noted in our study in the control population. Cardiac involvement remains a primary determinant of prognosis irrespective to age. Although over one-half of young pts are alive 10 years after the diagnosis (contrast ≈15% ≥ 65 years), early mortality remains substantial irrespective of age. An ASCT-based approach is associated with superior outcome in the young. A greater proportion of the young pts is fitter and ASCT-eligible at diagnosis, and should therefore be offered this approach. Disclosures Dispenzieri: Jannsen: Research Funding; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; GSK: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Research Funding; pfizer: Research Funding; Prothena: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Alnylam: Research Funding. Kumar:Array BioPharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kesios: Consultancy; Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding; Noxxon Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Glycomimetics: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy; Skyline: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kapoor:Amgen: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding.